I don't know about "primarily" or what that means. As my dad likes to tell my siblings and I -- we are full on his side and full on my mom's side, hence we are full on both sides and hence, it would follow that we are primarily from both, no? :) Therefore, Tiger is full on his dad's side and full on his mom's side. In Thailand he's claimed as one of their own.

All gods are not immortal. Millionaires will always be with us, and the Tiger tapes will be played centuries from now.

Well, you know, dd, things never die in the matrix. Hence, dd's posts will be immortal, no? ;)

Demanding that he always be deep and thoughtful in one specific form and voice is limiting and mean. Furthermore to expect it does not indicate a drawback for him but for you, Dear Horatio, who thinks to wear a chastity belt of the mind and would impose it on others. Heh. ;)

So no -- liveblogging is not lame. Come.on!

I read that piece by Mamdani over the weekend. Loved it and am eagerly awaiting his book to arrive in the mail, not that I will be able to read it anytime soon, but I cannot wait to page through it and see what it's like. :)

In the meantime, over on the cafe side of TPM, Saskia Sassen kind of alludes to this continuous relationship of one "war" (Cold) morphing into another "war" (Terror -- and a sillier term there never was, like, really.)and in tangent with Juan Cole's new book argues for the evolution of a new actor in these kinds of "wars."

As to the conflation between struggle for South Sudan and Statism, yes, that has happened. Hence Bashir claiming and finding support in Khartoum that the ICC's ruling is a "colonial" venture and his claims are finding support with various foreign ministers from various AU nations attending the African summit in Copenhagen. Of course, whipping "colonialism" as the great hoary still gets people riled up, and justly. But it has been so misused by Mugabe, Taylor and many others and now Bashir.

Having said that, I will take issue with Mamdani's assessment that this is a "demonization" of Arabs as it transfers back to the US. Some of that really is going on at the ground level with the janjaweed and it's despicable activities. In fact, I will assert that a lot of it is going on at the ground level. Of course, Mamdani -- in that interview, at least --- also leaves out the contestation happening between Islam and Christianity and various other traditions. Not to mention China's bloody fingers in the mess.

http://www.newtimes.co.rw/index.php?issue=13834&article=14146

Rec'd!

I missed your previous exciting post. Abject apologies, O favorite one. It interfered with the many naps on my agenda, especially after the multiple all night vigils I kept, waiting for AIG to give up their bonuses, given that they'd just hung us up to dry. Heh.

I agree, Teh Treasury would be a more fun place with Elliott Spitzer as Teh Secy (hmmm, is that a governmental/Washingtonian way to spell sexy?). He'd take to Operation Clean-up with a giant bottle of 409.

Angles belong in SciFi only if they are dancing on pin-heads, no?

Let me try again. :)

You use the term "Muslim-American," Why? Why not simply an American? What's contained in that hyphenation? What kind of identity has been negotiated to generate that hypen?

Let me underline two markers of such frontier spaces. I think of frontier zones as spaces of imbrication, of mixing, of interdependence. They are not lines where civilizations clash. Secondly, they are spaces where the work of teasing out the rules of engagements/encounters can happen.

The making of a new political zone -a frontier zone-- through the emergence of a new political actor at a global stage, where before the norm of liberal democracy reigned as the deserving actor for dominating the global stage, particularly after the end of the Cold War

The two zones have different rules of engagement.

One is where Democracy reigns as the deserving actor, sets the rules and thus proclaims its right to dominate the global stage. This has been so voiced and specifically since the Cold War because it was also the rhetoric of the Cold War era confrontations. In fact the whole thing was engaged on that trope.

The other, as Ms. Sassen lays it out and as I understand it, is that in our cities ----- where now we find Mosques and significant Muslim populations whose histories have been distorted in the larger discourse by Democratic Therefore Deserving actor ----- are the loci where this will be resolved and it is not a "clash of civ" but a mixing, a conversation, a merging and emerging (of different histories) and yet a separateness, an imbrication (noun: covering with a design in which one element covers a part of another --as with tiles or shingles) will happen, indeed is happening.

Therefore cities - major metropoles - Manila, London, Paris, NYC, Amman, Baghdad --- are where the rules of engagement between US-Muslim world is being set/will be established. Different histories will be the center/focus/emphasis for negotiations and that will be the focus, instead of Denigrations Delivered for Democracy. I don't understand why this is of any particular contention to you and BevD. Seems so straightforward to me.

Ok. How about we walk retribution back to wanting simple accountability and change in how these kinds of banks do business here and abroad. It's one thing for you and me, living in purportedly the richest country in the world, with the time for an online life, but think of the peasant in other countries who is going to suffer because his buyer, the middleman to his connection to the global market, is likely telling him that there is no market for his goods/crops this year. So, then, contrast that with the BonusMongers. In fact, you don't even have to go abroad to deal with some peasant, how about right here on ground, in our own lives, how many people do you and I see affected? I think our anger is so justified.

Also, what she says was anticipated in that some of the biggest antiwar demonstrations, preceding the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, happened in Rome, London, Madrid and NYC, DC etc. So they are in effect post-colonial frontiers. Because, certainly, the govts of said countries went to war regardless of the large numbers who came out to protest in their biggest cities.

As to the Old West in Manila, I love the analogy. I recall reading in the Guardian that in the first forays by US troops into Baghdad -- an ancient capital in an ancient land which has undergone many transformations and seen the rise and fall of many empires and wars -- and some of the troops could only comment that it was a no-mans land a very "backwards" place, because it had no McDonalds. At the very least, the news from Iraq has been packed with distortions of its people and their histories.

I think there is something else that is becoming visible, even though it may have been taking shape for many years. The making of a new political zone -a frontier zone-- through the emergence of a new political actor at a global stage, where before the norm of liberal democracy reigned as the deserving actor for dominating the global stage, particularly after the end of the Cold War

That's where your post grabs me, between those quotes. I find your concept of new political zones as the new frontier fascinating. Multiple histories which have not penetrated into the dominant understandings, combined with the making of new political zones as the outposts where these histories emerge, find voice and then have to be contended with is lovely. Really. I love the idea that the multiple histories manifest and then compete with the center's efforts at monolithic direction of policies driven from one direction with one agenda. Instead it becomes a contestation, (a conversation, at the very least then...) which then becomes an accommodation and then a place of understanding which then in turn, as an outpost, becomes an actor in the global political game.

Fab post, Ms. Sassen.

See, I wish you would write a full post on it and flesh it out more. I am a mere mortal and not an economist and cannot even claim to have a frikking clue about high finance. What I see is that yes, we have been living high and recklessly for decades on credit and I suppose it had to right itself, a you say. But what I don't understand is how and why so many people made the the same mistake, like, really. Lemmings?

Nevertheless, it can only be good that SoS Hillary Clinton was successful in her intervention with Zardari or behalf of the Chief Justice. However, if the Punjab police have more or less mutinied, then the problem is an ongoing and growing one for Islamabad.

How will Obama handle Pakistan's America Anxiety, specially if Obama sends in more troops/footprint expanding counter-insurgency into neighboring Afghanistan and also begins bombing particular areas within Pakistan? That is the question I have too. I'm hoping he will ask you, Prof. Cole. :)

With the global economy in tremors, shaking markets and finances to bits, what can be done for Pakistan to feel that they are players in their own destiny and not pawns in our Excellent Adventure? I have no idea. I was hoping you would tell us.

Where I work, the word is that we may face salary cuts in the next month or so. And we are all thinking that this is better than people getting laid off.

For us, down here, not living in AIGFP/CITI's rarefied atmosphere, far from the financial high times of Wall Street, that's the diff. We are grateful that it's only a pay cut and not a layoff of colleagues which will turn all our job-lives into hell, and they are kvetching about why their bonuses are a must. That's what enrages me. And these are the people who caused this debacle, so why are they getting rewarded when what I do is so much more important and helpful to the society I live in?

Welcome, Prof. Cole. I've read some of your other books, but not this one yet. Looking forward to it, really.

I wish Barnett Rubin and Robert Crews had also been invited to comment. I would have liked that, along with an Arab commenter.

Way cool.